About your Search

20121204
20121204
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
, frankly, this gives the white house and this gives the obama administration much more bargaining leverage. >> well, the former treasury secretary has one thing to say but many other voices are a virtual kcacophony where wolf blitzer has to sit every day. >> in the short term the president has more leverage right now because if they do nothing, let's say they avoid any legislation between now and the end of the year, starting january 1st we go over that so-called fiscal cliff, tax rates go up not just for the rich but for the middle class, for everyone, all those cuts in domestic spending and naths security spending, they go into effect. people aren't going to be happy about that, and the president will be able to say, look, i begged them, i repeatedly said 98% of the american public, they wouldn't get a tax increase if we just took them out of the equation, let's pass legislation extending the bush tax cuts for everyone earning under $250,000 a year. they didn't do it. so, you know, he'll have some leverage on that in terms of the politics because politically, you know, the polls all are
from the paralyzing effects of the toxin. this new intelligence has the obama administration so concerned, harsh warnings came from the president himself. >> i want to make it absolutely clear to assad and those under his command the world is watching. the use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable. if you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons, there will be consequences, and you will be held accountable. >> reporter: a senior official tells abc news there are contingency plans for military action if the weapons became a threat. the syrian regime said it would not use chemical weapons under any circumstance, but president ass assad's father used them, and assad himself has been massacring his citizens for nearly two straight years. martha raddatz, abc news, washington. >> it's a little hard to believe since tens of thousands of folks have been killed already, use of chemical weapons would be off limits to the syrian regime right now. considering rebels have made advances that may be one of the most powerful weapons the government has in its arsenal rig
at the amount of time, particularly in the obama administration, even more so than the george w. bush of administration, you look at senior officials who go to asia, throughout the region, and also the discussion and attempt to courtney with china. there seems to be a lot of that to try to coordinate. but again coming back to jim steinberg was the fourth member of this panel would happily and armitage and joe knight looking at the die you island dispute, and said they were shocked and surprised why the level of miscommunication, ms. assessment and dangerous of that between china and japan. so it raises them up question of whether or not, i agree. i know china wants respect to whether or not what you are seeing is a strategic game, or tactical game by china to use its potential ms. assessment to kind of look like the unstable part in some of his to basically help push out some interest. and that we've been a little bit. >> steve, i think the essential question is not of domination or respect, it's about whether it will be static of whether it will be dynamic. and there is no way that n
so far. this is the obama's administration offer. every day here in "the new york times"of the two proposals a the fiscal cliff continues to dominate washington here today and this week. irandy in alabama, republicans. caller: i think both of the approaches here are ridiculous. we keep talking about reforming the taxes when it is so complicated that an average person cannot even do it. it's really time to stop reforming the idea of taxes with all these tax ideas. it all it's going to do is drive up inflation. every time we raise taxes, inflation goes up. we really need to go to something like a consumption tax. there's a lot of space out your that do not even haven't come taxes, and their roads are really nice and they do not have been come taxes. they live off other taxes. i think they need to try to fix this whole thing was out just keeping throwing money at it. increasing rates and all of this stuff, it's madness. host: we showed you what senate majority leader harry reid had to say it in reaction to last night proposal from speaker john boehner. house democrats are having a cau
the obama administration put the payroll tax cut back on the table in the proposal. i know that the white house is doing these my# -- my2k hash tags. why not my3k because the payroll is back in it? >> that's a good question. i appreciate the contribution to the communication's thinking. the facts of the matter is we are clear that we believe unemployment insurance has to be extended, and we believe all the precisions expire at the end of the year have to be a part of the conversation and discussion. we are interested in payroll tax cuts being interested in very much part of the discussion. i'm not going to get into the specifics of our negotiations, but, you know, two things. one is we fought very hard. the president fought hard for the payroll tax cut and the payroll tax cut extension. around this time last year, i think i was entertaining similar questions, which is, why cannot the president meet with speaker boehner right now? the deal was done, and american families benefited enormously from it during a time it was important economically, and we'll evaluate that in the broader discuss
the number of permits during the obama administration's first term and there will be a price to pay in our energy costs over the next four years. we hear people saying over and over and over again, americans must pay their fair share. the rich must pay their fair share. everyone must pay their fair share and on that i am in 100% agreement with our president, with leader reid at the other end of this building, with my friends across the aisle, democrats here who want everybody to pay their fair share, i'm in 1 pun% agreement. we -- 100% agreement. we absolutely should do that. make everybody pay their fair share. lots of folks use the metaphor, let's make sure everybody has some skin in the game. well, if you really want to have everyone pay their fair share, there is an easy answer and fortunately it would drive this economy to brand new heights, it would drive this country and our economy to a new economic renaissance. it would be incredible and all of our friends around the country who are suffering, who don't have even $3 a gallon to pay for gasoline, it would help them when they can't
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)